# In the matter of Partha Sarathy Sarkar vs. Specified Undertaking of Unit Trust of India Ltd. & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2023-12-12. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLAT-00033. The appeal challenges the order dated September 27, 2023, by the National Company Law…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 12 Dec 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLAT-00033
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/partha-sarathy-sarkar-vs-specified-undertaking-of-unit-trust-of-india-ltd-ors-3e4fcde4

## Summary

### Background

The appeal challenges the order dated September 27, 2023, by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Jaipur Bench, which allowed an application under Section 27 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, to replace the Appellant (Resolution Professional) with another Resolution Professional, Mr. Ankit Goel. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) commenced against Modern Syntex India Limited on February 28, 2022. The Appellant was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and later confirmed as the Resolution Professional. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) includes Specified Undertaking of Unit Trust of India Ltd. (SUUTI), holding a 74.64% vote share. SUUTI requested the Resolution Professional to reduce his fee and CIRP costs on July 19,

…

## Facts

On February 28, 2022, CIRP commenced against Modern Syntex India Limited, and the Appellant was appointed as the IRP and later confirmed as the Resolution Professional. The CoC included SUUTI with a 74.64% vote share. On July 19, 2023, SUUTI requested the Appellant to reduce his fee and CIRP costs, which the Appellant declined. A CoC meeting was requested to replace the Resolution Professional. A Joint Lenders Meeting selected Mr. Ankit Goel as the new RP, quoting a lower fee. The Adjudicating Authority approved the replacement on September 27, 2023. The Appellant alleged that he wrote to SUUTI to take legal action for stripping off the assets of the Corporate Debtor in June 2018, but SUUTI did not accede to the request. The Appellant also claimed that the Adjudicating

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority was justified in approving the replacement of the Appellant as …

**Ratio:** Section 27 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code empowers the Committee of Creditors to

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal reasoned that the CoC is empowered to pass a resolution to replace the RP

…

**Interpretation:** Section 27 grants significant authority to the CoC in the CIRP process,

…

**Application:** The Tribunal applied Section 27 to the facts, noting that the CoC had valid

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…
- **Appellants:** Partha Sarathy…
- **Respondents:** Modern Syntex…; Ankit G…
- **Advocates:** Adish Aga…; Kairav Anil…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2022-02-28 — CIRP Commen…**: CIRP commenced against…
- **2023-07-19 — SUUTI Re…**: SUUTI requested the Resolution…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 27 — Replacement of resolution professional by…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-27)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/partha-sarathy-sarkar-vs-specified-undertaking-of-unit-trust-of-india-ltd-ors-3e4fcde4